On 29/09/2020 11:35, Christoph Berg wrote:
Hi,
I have some concerns that the naming of the new FST protocols will
confuse everyone, because the names are just too close together. In
the wsjtx mode menu the list is now:
FST4
FST4W
FT4
FT8
which all look similar. Also, when saying "I have worked A0BC in FST4"
people will likely not always realize the difference.
Maybe moving the letters around would make the difference easier to
grap? SFT4? Also, using a different number would make the distinction
more clear, both visually and when spoken. "SFT2".
On the WSPR side, if FST4W is meant to replace WSPR, why not name it
as such, WSPR2? The "W" suffix on FST4W looks like it's a FST4
submode, which it isn't, I guess. And "whisper two" is really much
nicer to pronounce and remember than "FST4W".
Also, I suggest moving FST4W next to WSPR in the mode menu.
73,
Christoph DF7CB
Hi Christoph,
that boat has sailed, hi.
With respect to similarities between WSPR and FST4W, the FST4W protocol
is much more like FST4 than WSPR, the similarities end at the message
content and information bit count, other than those FST4W is very
similar to FST4.
We think it is unlikely that FST4/FST4W will be used on the same bands
as other WSJT-X modes, more likely modes like WSPR and JT9 will be
superseded by FST4W and FST4 as they have clear advantages.
Your suggestion to move FST4W next to WSPR in the mode drop-down menu
definitely has merits.
73
Bill
G4WJS.
_______________________________________________
wsjt-devel mailing list
wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wsjt-devel
